New TV deal brings salary cap up to $7m?

[Nashy]

If we had offered Hunt $1 million a season I would have thought we were mental cases. IMO he isn't and never was worth that in any code.

Any player is "worth" whatever a club is prepared to pay them.

 

[Charmamba]

If we had offered Hunt $1 million a season I would have thought we were mental cases. IMO he isn't and never was worth that in any code.

Any player is "worth" whatever a club is prepared to pay them.

Unless it's Sandow....

 

[Kimlo]

If we had offered Hunt $1 million a season I would have thought we were mental cases. IMO he isn't and never was worth that in any code.

Any player is "worth" whatever a club is prepared to pay them.

[icon_lol1. [icon_lol1. [icon_lol1. [icon_lol1.

 

[Flutterby]

If we had offered Hunt $1 million a season I would have thought we were mental cases. IMO he isn't and never was worth that in any code.

Any player is "worth" whatever a club is prepared to pay them.

Exactly - and he isn't worth that to me (note the IMO in my original post). If a club thought/thinks he is worth that to them, that's their choice, but I would think they are mental.

 

[Anonymous person]

If we had offered Hunt $1 million a season I would have thought we were mental cases. IMO he isn't and never was worth that in any code.

I don't think he's worth 1m a year either, but someone like Smith, Cronk, Thurston, etc Would be worth $1m a year in a $7m salary cap IMO and with a big cap we are much more likely to keep them.

this is what i DONT want to happen - player prices increase significantly across the board just because there is extra money around.

a nuffie generic player shouldnt go from $150k to $300k just because the salary cap has doubled. they should stay on 150k. noone should be close to $1mil a year from the salary cap, not even thurston etc. at most it should be like $500k, and then whatever outside-the-salary-cap deals they can get. remember, this deal also says itll go from a top 25 to a top 30, meaning 5 more players to pay. cant double everyones salary and also hire 5 new players on huge salaries too.

they need to think about how to spend the increased cap rather than just handing out huge contract upgrades to everyone IMO.

 

[Charmamba]

If we had offered Hunt $1 million a season I would have thought we were mental cases. IMO he isn't and never was worth that in any code.

I don't think he's worth 1m a year either, but someone like Smith, Cronk, Thurston, etc Would be worth $1m a year in a $7m salary cap IMO and with a big cap we are much more likely to keep them.

this is what i DONT want to happen - player prices increase significantly across the board just because there is extra money around.

a nuffie generic player shouldnt go from $150k to $300k just because the salary cap has doubled. they should stay on 150k. noone should be close to $1mil a year from the salary cap, not even thurston etc. at most it should be like $500k, and then whatever outside-the-salary-cap deals they can get. remember, this deal also says itll go from a top 25 to a top 30, meaning 5 more players to pay. cant double everyones salary and also hire 5 new players on huge salaries too.

they need to think about how to spend the increased cap rather than just handing out huge contract upgrades to everyone IMO.

Isn't that pretty much what someone like Thurston would get now? Do it your way and we will continue to lose players to other codes.

And Fair enough 5 more players, those will be nothing players on say $100,000 so we will still have another 3mil or so left. Increase the top players pays. We could afford another half a mil across say 4 top players per club, with another Mil topping up middle range players,

Think about, your man Slater could be earning 1mil a year and you would be able to go to real French restaurants with him on dates.

 

[Coxy]

I agree with AP in that rookies shouldn't get more than they get now. But the elite should definitely be able to get $800K+.

 

[Charmamba]

I'm still trying to work out who AP was arguing with about the Rookies, noone anywhere has said to increase rookies pay only the Stars.

 

[Coxy]

I'm still trying to work out who AP was arguing with about the Rookies, noone anywhere has said to increase rookies pay only the Stars.

I bet managers will start arguing to increase the pay of the rookies...

 

[Bucking Beads]

What do the rookies get paid?? A 10k a year payrise wouldn't hurt IMO but we don't want under 20's players taking home the big bucks.

 

[Anonymous person]

Isn't that pretty much what someone like Thurston would get now? Do it your way and we will continue to lose players to other codes.

And Fair enough 5 more players, those will be nothing players on say $100,000 so we will still have another 3mil or so left. Increase the top players pays. We could afford another half a mil across say 4 top players per club, with another Mil topping up middle range players,

did we lose thurston to another code though? did we lose cam smith? hayne? lockyer?

no. we lost a showpony only in it for the fame and fortune (hunt), and a mormon (who wouldve had everyone to do with his church - who take something stupid like 20% of all his wages - telling him AFL was the way to go). apart from that, we dont really lose too many huge names. even with $7mil, you cant afford to pay 1 guy a million a year. it just doesnt work. do you really think people would be happy seeing their teammate on a mil a season while theyre on $300k?

and why would the extra 5 players be nobodies on 100k? if teams were smart, theyd invest in some good established players on good money so when the injuries inevitably hit, we bring in a player just as good as the guy whos missing. even if a guy like Reed wasnt playing first grade every week, he'd probably stick around if hes on $250k a season.

i just think having 2-3 guys at each team on around $1mil a season is asking for trouble. think about it - they sign for $1mil a season now, how much are they going to want NEXT deal? they surely wont settle for $1mil a season again, so its off to overseas unless you wanna pay them $1.5mil. as it is, theyre staying in league on $400k-$500k. bump them up another $100k or so next year,then another $100k the next. that way theyre getting more money every year, and its great money, and theres room to increase for further contracts. dont just bump them up to the maximum straight away.

I'm still trying to work out who AP was arguing with about the Rookies, noone anywhere has said to increase rookies pay only the Stars.

im trying to work out where i said ANYTHING about rookies? [eusa_eh

 

[Coxy]

a nuffie generic player shouldnt go from $150k to $300k just because the salary cap has doubled. they should stay on 150k

 

[Anonymous person]

a nuffie generic player shouldnt go from $150k to $300k just because the salary cap has doubled. they should stay on 150k

im talking casey mcguire/steve michaels type players, not rookies.

 

[Ari Gold]

a nuffie generic player shouldnt go from $150k to $300k just because the salary cap has doubled. they should stay on 150k

To be fair, that's about generic nuffies, not rookies.

 

[Bucking Beads]

a nuffie generic player shouldnt go from $150k to $300k just because the salary cap has doubled. they should stay on 150k

im talking casey mcguire/steve michaels type players, not rookies.

I agree about them not getting there Salary's doubled put they should certainly get some sort of Pay rise.

 

[Coxy]

It's the same argument though. Why would "nuffy players" get their pay doubled? They'd get some increase, but the suggestion of $150K-$300K is laughable.

 

[Charmamba]

a nuffie generic player shouldnt go from $150k to $300k just because the salary cap has doubled. they should stay on 150k

im talking casey mcguire/steve michaels type players, not rookies.

Ah yes pick 2 players who are going pretty well for their new clubs as an example.... awesome


But yeah nothing players like Champion shouldn't get big raises. icon_thumbs_u

 

[Ari Gold]

The problem is there are NOT enough quality players for 16 teams to have 30 players paid on merit. Souths were paying Colin Best (a beacon of genericism) massive amounts for reasons that I can only assume to be that they had a lot of cash and not many willing to go the souths. I hate to think how this might happen on larger scales.

Also look at the Sharks. I heard Douglas is leaving for less than the Sharks offered. Ferguson also left them for what he errantly thought was a team with better prospects. With an increased cap less players are going to be forced out and have to sign with the Sharks, which don't get me wrong, is a great thing. Less players forced out due to $$$ the better. That said, what sort of ridiculous overs are they going to have to pay players?